New tensions in Rwanda are not the result of a failure by the Rwanda tribunal to deliver justice, but of the struggle for food and land, says Jeroen Corduwener.By Jeroen Corduwener
June 25, 2009
Photo:
Rwandans demonstrate in Kigali in 2006 to denounce France's alleged complicity in the 1994 genocide. Photo AFP
In the article France and the Tutsi have to face justice in Rwanda too, Marcia Luyten argues that all those involved in the genocide in Rwanda in 1994 should be put on trial internationally: not just the Hutu, but also the Tutsi who killed tens of thousands of Hutus, and international players like France.
Luyten bases her argument on the assumption that a repeat of '1994' can be prevented if the path of international justice is followed in Rwanda. This analysis and conclusion do not add up. First of all because justice is not an end in itself, and certainly not in a country where this could lead to destabilisation. And secondly because the greatest threat to Rwanda is not in its past, unresolved or not, but in poverty, and the shortage of land and food.
Liberator
The genocide was aimed at the Tutsi. Current president Paul Kagame and his RPF stopped the mass killings in 1994. Although there are questions about whether this was Kagame's principal goal, or just a means to get to power, it does not detract from the fact itself. Kagame took power as a dictator, but he has great authority precisely because he is seen as the liberator.
This is true in his own country but also at the international level: both the European Union and the United States treat Kagame with kid gloves. When Luyten makes the argument that the Netherlands can and should play a more critical role in Rwanda, she should know that the Netherlands is a relatively small donor and plays an accordingly minor role in the diplomatic game in Kigali.
Anyone wanting to investigate the crimes committed by the RPF threatens the stability, not only of Rwanda, but of the region as a whole. It is precisely the lack of stability that has cost hundreds of thousands of lives in the region over the past decades. It is a dilemma of justice versus stability. It is for these reasons that the US has blocked such an investigation by the Rwanda tribunal.
The US has taken over the role of France as the most important international player in Rwanda. The detrimental support from France for the previous regime is well-known, but remains without repercussions. The same scenario applies here as to the absence of an investigation into the RPF: geopolitical interests and diplomatic relations stand in the way of justice.
One people
Tutsi and Hutu have been united as ‘Banyarwanda’ by Kagame: ‘One people, one destiny' is the slogan that can be read on billboards in Kigali: pseudo-Marxism in miniature. Many Hutus feel their suffering has gone unnoticed, but it is incorrect to assume that this gives rise to a new generation of victims, with the ultimate result that the violence will be repeated, as Luyten writes. The largest group of forgotten victims are the Tutsi survivors of the genocide, who do not feel recognised as such.
All these Rwandans live together in one of the smallest and most densely populated countries in Africa. And that population is growing at a dizzying rate. In 1994, the country had four million inhabitants, there are currently over ten million, a number that will double in ten years' time. Rwanda is fertile, but it is unable to feed such a large population, despite all attempts at land reform and economic growth.
The new tensions arise only from this and they threaten stability and peace. The greatest dangers are the struggle for food, land and economic ownership. The large majority of the desperately poor will turn on the small group of rich. And it in turn will defend itself.
Ethnic relations could play a role in this, intensified by the linguistic divide between English and French speakers. But it will be a response, not the underlying cause. If the international community is really concerned about the future of Rwanda, it should focus on investing in eliminating that underlying cause.
In the article France and the Tutsi have to face justice in Rwanda too, Marcia Luyten argues that all those involved in the genocide in Rwanda in 1994 should be put on trial internationally: not just the Hutu, but also the Tutsi who killed tens of thousands of Hutus, and international players like France.
Luyten bases her argument on the assumption that a repeat of '1994' can be prevented if the path of international justice is followed in Rwanda. This analysis and conclusion do not add up. First of all because justice is not an end in itself, and certainly not in a country where this could lead to destabilisation. And secondly because the greatest threat to Rwanda is not in its past, unresolved or not, but in poverty, and the shortage of land and food.
Liberator
The genocide was aimed at the Tutsi. Current president Paul Kagame and his RPF stopped the mass killings in 1994. Although there are questions about whether this was Kagame's principal goal, or just a means to get to power, it does not detract from the fact itself. Kagame took power as a dictator, but he has great authority precisely because he is seen as the liberator.
This is true in his own country but also at the international level: both the European Union and the United States treat Kagame with kid gloves. When Luyten makes the argument that the Netherlands can and should play a more critical role in Rwanda, she should know that the Netherlands is a relatively small donor and plays an accordingly minor role in the diplomatic game in Kigali.
Anyone wanting to investigate the crimes committed by the RPF threatens the stability, not only of Rwanda, but of the region as a whole. It is precisely the lack of stability that has cost hundreds of thousands of lives in the region over the past decades. It is a dilemma of justice versus stability. It is for these reasons that the US has blocked such an investigation by the Rwanda tribunal.
The US has taken over the role of France as the most important international player in Rwanda. The detrimental support from France for the previous regime is well-known, but remains without repercussions. The same scenario applies here as to the absence of an investigation into the RPF: geopolitical interests and diplomatic relations stand in the way of justice.
One people
Tutsi and Hutu have been united as ‘Banyarwanda’ by Kagame: ‘One people, one destiny' is the slogan that can be read on billboards in Kigali: pseudo-Marxism in miniature. Many Hutus feel their suffering has gone unnoticed, but it is incorrect to assume that this gives rise to a new generation of victims, with the ultimate result that the violence will be repeated, as Luyten writes. The largest group of forgotten victims are the Tutsi survivors of the genocide, who do not feel recognised as such.
All these Rwandans live together in one of the smallest and most densely populated countries in Africa. And that population is growing at a dizzying rate. In 1994, the country had four million inhabitants, there are currently over ten million, a number that will double in ten years' time. Rwanda is fertile, but it is unable to feed such a large population, despite all attempts at land reform and economic growth.
The new tensions arise only from this and they threaten stability and peace. The greatest dangers are the struggle for food, land and economic ownership. The large majority of the desperately poor will turn on the small group of rich. And it in turn will defend itself.
Ethnic relations could play a role in this, intensified by the linguistic divide between English and French speakers. But it will be a response, not the underlying cause. If the international community is really concerned about the future of Rwanda, it should focus on investing in eliminating that underlying cause.
Note:
Jeroen Corduwener is a historian and a journalist who lives and works in Rwanda
Related Materials:
Dear Jeroen Corduwener:
ReplyDeleteI read your article found under this url: http://www.nrc.nl/international/opinion/article2282136.ece/In_Rwanda%2C_stability_sometimes_comes_before_justice
I was surprised at the arguments you advance for this theory and I found it all extremely poor to say the least.
I will not get into the inacurracies in the article about the population but I will challenge the assumption that the RPF has brought stability to the region:
What stability in Rwanda and the region are you refering to exactly? Unless your intentions are to insult the intelligence of those who understand the situation in the country and in the region.
1. Did you know the region before the RPF invasion of Rwanda in 1990? Please compare the decades of stability, peace and economic development (in Rwanda) compared to the period afterwards.
The region has not known peace but stability has been at an all time low and instability has increased over the years since 1990 with genocide and wars in Rwanda, Burundi, Congo. These wars have claimed over 6 million lives of innocent civilians manly children, women and elderly. The RPF has been the major aggressor, the biggest player, and responsible for the overwhelming majority of these deaths.
2. The RPF sycophants in power in Kigali continue to such the population's blood with peopole dying from starvation in rural rwanda where people are living off of 42cents a day. You call this stability?
3. People are living under terror of being accused of committing a genocide crime or the different RPF invented crimes. Some are serving harsh jail terms for "thoughts" and I have never heard of a country that has laws banning thinking.
4. Congo and her people are being RAPED by the Rwandan soldiers occupying the East of Congo and you call this stability in the region?
5. Do you know how many refugees or internally displaced people (IDP) the region had produced before 1990? The total number was in thousands. Since the RPF invasion of Rwanda in 1990, there are millions of refugees and IDP's produced in the region. If stability to you means forcing people out of their homes by the millions, something is not right with your logic.
6. There are thousands, if not millions of us who have had our families exterminated by the RPF who are seeing these criminals parade the streets of Kigali, killing whoever and whenever they please. We are sickened and Justice is the only remedy.
There is a great deal of cynism in your article. My hope is that this is out of ignorance which can be corrected by a little bit of research. Otherwise, it is a sick way of trying to hold the people from Great Lakes Region of Africa hostage by the RPF Criminals.
Regards,
Dear Jeroen Corduwener,
ReplyDeleteThank you for the article.
It is true that the greatest threat Rwanda faces on a daily basis is the widespread rural poverty which may utimately lead to eruption of new violences.
However, claiming that Kagame has unified Rwandans as "one people" is a fly in the face of historical evidences.
Since you are based in Rwanda, you should easily do your homework and find out the accuracy of your statements.
It is true that it will be very hard for any foreigner to understand the very sophisticated malicious plans that RPF has installed in Rwanda but you should give it a try and several sources are out there to help you uncovering the truth about TIG works and the Gacaca courts all of which are designed to oppress a specific group of the Rwandan people.
For your own information, please read the following article about the role of free labor in current Rwanda's economic prosperity: Rwanda: Economic Growth Sustained Through Free Labor
Claiming that " Anyone wanting to investigate the crimes committed by the RPF threatens the stability, not only of Rwanda, but of the region as a whole" is not true and misleading as well.
This misleading statement is aimed at legitimizing Kagame as a liberator which indeed he is not. Instead, reliable sources attest that Kagame himself and his RPF movement, have overwhelming responsabilities in the Rwandan tragedy and instabilty in the region.
Any criminal should face justice for the sake of national reconciliation and stabilty in the region. There is no military solutions to political problems in the region. Time will tell.
The following statement is also totally false and misleading:
"....In 1994, the country had four (4) million inhabitants, there are currently over ten million, a number that will double in ten years' time....".
Every Rwandan knows that in 1994 Rwanda was home of more than 8 million people. If we substract one million Tutsi killed during the genocide, where are the other 3 million missing on your account?
This kind of journalism should be massively denounced because it does not honor neither the victims of the Rwandan genocide nor the International Community.
Thanks.
FYI:
Rwanda People 1993
http://www.theodora.com/wfb/1993/rwanda/rwanda_people.html
SOURCE: 1993 CIA WORLD FACTBOOK
Population: 8,206,450
Population Growth Rate: 3.80
Birth rate per 1000: 52
Death rate per 1000: 14
Net migration rate per 1000: NA
Infant mortality rate per 1000: 108
Life expectancy (M) years: 51
Life expectancy (F) years: 55
Fertility rate per woman: 8.30
Literacy %: NA
Literacy (M) %: NA
Literacy (F) %: NA
Dear Mr. Jeroen Corduwener:
ReplyDeleteI am delighted to see your article shading light on your new school of thought. First of all, I would like you to get some facts straight. When you claim that in 1994, the country had four million inhabitants, you are already dismissing the number put forth by the RPF lie machine, that claims 800,000 thousand Tutsi butchered during the genocide of Rwandese people. Knowing that Tutsi counted for about 10% of inhabitants in 1994, there could not have been any surviving Tutsi if we go by your faulty numbers. In order to make up for the difference, those who carried out the genocide must have crossed the country to find other victims abroad. Let me remind you that the Rwandan population was projected from previous census around 8,000,000, and not the half of that. It was estimated that it would have doubled in 15 years if the growth rate was unchanged.
There are many other inconsistencies in your article, but let me say something about your philosophy on achieving stability. One of your statements says: “First of all because justice is not an end in itself, and certainly not in a country where this could lead to destabilization.”
This argument is ridiculous at best. I know that freedom and justice are prerequisite of the ultimate goal for everyone under the sun: “peace”. If the justice is one step to achieving peace, can you then explain how rendering justice would lead to destabilization? I find this to be your way of confirming that that RPF are a criminal gang bent on retaining power at all costs who do not hesitate to use mass murder as a tool to maintain power. I believe that justice is one of the major instruments of insuring stability. Do you think that a repressive regime like RPF will be able to keep a part of its population under oppression indefinitely? Is slave submission of the oppressed people in Rwanda by the RPF regime what you call stability? It was unheard of that in order to achieve stability, you have to deny justice to deserving people, wage wars against neighbors, and the like. Only you or RPF uphold this totally misguided philosophy.
Again you said “Kagame took power as a dictator, but he has great authority precisely because he is seen as the liberator.” You couldn’t have done a better job undermining the truth. Please, why not call a pig, a pig? You know very well that Kagame, using his Ugandan military forces conquered Rwanda and seized the power as a criminal, led the country as a dictator and is holding the whole region hostage as a tyrant. Here is the man who led a foreign army to conquer another country, attacked it, launched a genocide there and stopped it after making sure he had seized the power. Should he be called only liberator, why not giving him all the credit of his deeds. For 13 years, he has been waging an expansionism war against the neighboring Congo where his actions are imputed so far with about 6,000,000 dead. I cannot disagree enough with you about your philosophy and your definition of stability in light of the above facts.What do you call stability in the region? Can you explain how a war including among others genocide, massacres of civilians and pillage means the same thing as stability? Even if in the RPF philosophy achieving stability must be done through such malicious and despicable acts against a people who otherwise was living peacefully; what does stability you are referring to mean? Don’t you think that faking stability through subjugation of your people through oppression and denial of justice to the deserving could only incubate a time ticking bomb? How can you claim stability in a region where war has been raging for almost decades?